I want to do a foldl' and a foldr in parallel on a list. I assumed it
would be no good idea to run foldl' and foldr separately, because then the
input list must be stored completely between the calls of foldl' and
foldr. I wanted to be clever and implemented a routine which does foldl'
and fo
You're testing the interpreted code, so it's not surprising that the
naive version performs better; the interpretive overhead only applies
to your bit of glue code. So, you've succeeded in showing that
compiled code performs better than interpreted code, congratulations!
:)
A better test would be
On Fri, 5 Dec 2008, Ryan Ingram wrote:
You're testing the interpreted code, so it's not surprising that the
naive version performs better; the interpretive overhead only applies
to your bit of glue code.
I wanted to avoid the optimizer to do clever things itself.
Alternatively, at least com
Hi,
Am Freitag, den 05.12.2008, 23:43 +0100 schrieb Henning Thielemann:
> > ryani$ ghci foldlr.hs
> > [...]
> > Prelude FoldLR> :set +s
> > Prelude FoldLR> test
> > (100,'a')
> > (0.39 secs, 70852332 bytes)
> > Prelude FoldLR> testNaive
> > (100,'a')
> > (0.42 secs, 105383824 bytes)
>
> T
